Republicans scored significant
electoral gains last November by promising to rein in runaway spending and put
state government’s fiscal house in order. Yet in an early spending vote, the Michigan
Legislature — now decisively under GOP control — voted overwhelmingly
to increase the cost of a government tourism industry subsidy by 65 percent
above what had already been allocated for the year. New GOP Gov. Rick Snyder
asked for the increased spending, and the bill awaits his signature.

Despite concerns about the basic
fairness of the program, the propriety of spending more money on it, and its
overall effectiveness, just seven Republicans voted “no."

At issue was House Bill 4160,
legislation that increased the current year's cost of the “Pure Michigan” tourism
promotion from $15.4 million to $25.4 million. Snyder stated in his first State
of the State address that he wanted the higher cost for the program. During the
Granholm administration, spending for Pure Michigan and other promotional
advertisements had been as high as $33.2 million.

“The people elected us to save money, not spend more,” noted state Rep. Dave Agema of
Grandville, one of the House Republicans to vote against the bill.

“I ran on cutting the budget and
decreasing the size of government,” said Hooker. “For our first vote to be on
more spending — I couldn’t bring myself to do that.”

But Republicans voting "yes" were
effusive in their praise of Pure Michigan.

“Our economy is still fighting to
rebound, and investing in Pure Michigan has proven to provide an extra bounce,”
said state Rep. Wayne
Schmidt, R-Traverse City, sponsor of HB 4160.

Schmidt’s statement is from a news
release jointly issued with freshman GOP state Rep. Frank Foster of
Pellston.

“Pure Michigan is helping us to
reinvent our state by sharing our great opportunities and the positive attributes
that are more the reality of living in and visiting our great state,” echoed
freshman GOP state Rep. Matt Huuki of
Atlantic Mine.

State Rep. Bradford Jacobson,
another freshman Republican from Oxford, said the extra spending would provide
a “tremendous” boost to the state’s economy, and state Rep. Ken Horn,
R-Frankenmuth, stated that he was a “longtime advocate” for Pure Michigan and that
$25 million in annual funding was a “good benchmark.”

Some of the legislative support for more
funding was based upon a marketing
study done by Longwoods International in Toronto. The survey was paid for
by Travel Michigan, the tourism promotion agency within the Michigan Economic
Development Corporation. The survey purported
to show that $2.23 was spent in taxes by tourists in Michigan for every dollar
invested in placing Pure Michigan advertising spots on television.

But the legitimacy of that return on
investment calculation has come in for criticism due to concerns about the
study’s methodology.

An article in the Feb. 4, 2011,
edition of the MIRS Capitol Capsule daily newsletter asked: “Is it possible
Longwoods International has a vested interest in only giving rosy pictures for
these expenditures? Is Longwoods dependent on keeping the travel industry
happy?”

MIRS said that these questions had
not been asked by state government officials. Noting that Longwoods provides
similar marketing surveys for “at least” 25 other tourism boards across the
nation, MIRS reported a remarkable similarity to the reports: “If a study has
been done that didn’t show a [positive] return on investment from
taxpayer-funded advertisement, it has not been made public.”

“Michigan needs a study of Pure
Michigan that’s transparent and peer-reviewed,” said the Mackinac Center’s Mike
LaFaive to MIRS. “I have yet to see a study bought and paid for by the MEDC that
did not comport with its worldview.”

Republican state Rep. Tom McMillin,
R-Rochester Hills, an accountant, says he tried numerous times to get the text
of the Longwoods survey questions and other data from Travel Michigan so that
he could try to independently evaluate the Longwoods claims, but was given
nothing.

“The Longwoods 'study' (propaganda)
is completely bogus and is done by a firm that gets paid by many state
governments across the country to produce these non-statistically valid (which
the MEDC admits), so-called studies to support higher spending,” said McMillin.

Agema also said the return on
investment claims were “questionable.”

And while noting that he likes the
Pure Michigan program itself, Rep. Bob Genetski, R-Saugatuck,
cast one of the votes against HB 4160 because of concerns about the information coming from the state agency promoting it.

“Old habits die hard,” said
Genetski. “I still need to see more transparency out of the MEDC.”

But several Republicans voting for
the program were convinced that Longwoods got the details right.

“I’m very happy that the vote passed
the House, because I think that the math speaks for itself,” declared freshman
GOP Rep. Jon Bumstead
of Newaygo. “The return we have seen on our investment in the campaign so far
makes it a no-brainer to continue the funding.”

Freshman state Rep. Holly Hughes,
R-Montague, echoed the purported effectiveness of the survey itself: “For every
dollar spent there is a two dollar-plus return.”

“We are looking for something that
can return a benefit back to Michigan, and this is the best way to do it,” noted
Greg MacMaster
from Kewadin, another House Republican freshman.

And GOP state Sen. John Proos of
St. Joseph issued
a statement claiming an even greater rate of return than advertised: “For
every dollar we invest in Pure Michigan, the state gets back almost three
dollars in revenues.”

Meanwhile, McMillin was also
concerned about a bigger picture.

“I don’t think we should be picking
winners and losers by company, nor by industry,” he said of the $25.4 million
that the taxpayers will be spending to subsidize the advertising budget of one
industry. “The state isn’t and should not pay for advertising for non-tourist
businesses in my district or elsewhere. If this was such a great return, then
the industry itself would spend their own money, which they’ve made clear that
they will not.”

The vote in favor of spending the
additional $10 million on Pure Michigan was 95-13 in the House
of Representatives. The other Republicans to vote against the bill were Rep. Eileen Kowall of
White Lake, Rep. Pat
Somerville of New Boston, and Rep. Ray Franz of
Onekama.

There was no Republican opposition
at all in the Michigan Senate, where the additional spending passed on a vote
of 35-1.

The Michiganvotes.org roll call vote
for HB 4160 is listed below.

~~~~~

Lawmakers
who voted TO SPEND $10 MILLION MORE on Pure Michigan advertising:

Comments

StayEngaged

MostPopular

After months of pressure, the Saginaw Public Schools Board agreed to sell an unused building to a successful charter school in the city. The video shows the weeks of wrangling Francis Reh Academy endured.

RelatedSites

Would you like to see more information like this? Learn how you can help the Mackinac Center provide incisive, accurate and timely analysis of critical policy issues.